| RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Bernard Aboba (aboba |
|
| Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 03:20:38 -0500 (EST) | |
As I recall, the resolution of the comment in IEEE 802.1X-D7.1 was that an interface variable was needed so that EAP could indicate down to the lower layers whether a protected result indication was received. Nick -- if you're out there listening.... can you help us clear this up? On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, CONGDON,PAUL (HP-Roseville,ex1) wrote: > > It was both as I recall. The AAA attribute was clearly not necessary > because of the requirements for key derivation and mutual auth. Since this > wasn't required, the presence of the key could also be used by the pass-thru > authenticator and thus the new interface variable also wasn't needed. > Someone correct me if I'm out in the weeds.
- RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue, (continued)
- RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue John Vollbrecht, January 13 2004
- Re: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue Yoshihiro Ohba, January 13 2004
- Re: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue Bernard Aboba, January 14 2004
- RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue Bernard Aboba, January 14 2004
- RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue Nick Petroni, January 14 2004
- RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue John Vollbrecht, January 14 2004
- RE: Resolution of 802.1X/EAP-SM issue John Vollbrecht, January 14 2004
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.